[Scan-DC] Virginia Beach police plan to encrypt radio channels, stopping public from listening in

[Alan Henney]

Thanks to Art Audley for the heads up on this article...

Virginia Beach police plan to encrypt radio channels, stopping public from
listening in

https://pilotonline.com/news/government/local/article_4dd6223c-4fc1-11e8-97b1-a74471e84d6b.html?__vfz=medium%3Dsharebar


The Virginian - Pilot (Norfolk, VA.)

May 8, 2018

Virginia Beach police plan to encrypt radio channels, stopping public from
listening in

BYLINE: Robyn Sidersky, Amy Poulter and Jane Harper The Virginian-Pilot

SECTION: Main; Pg. 001

LENGTH: 1056 words

VIRGINIA BEACH

City police plan to begin encrypting all the radio channels they use,
ending the public’s ability to listen in.

It will go forward if the City Council approves a five-year, $6.2 million
plan when they vote May 15 on the budget .

In city documents, police said encryption is needed because criminals
listen to police communications. It would greatly increase officer safety
and help protect citizens, they wrote.

But it also could affect media coverage of public safety and undermine the
relationship between the press and the police, said Megan Rhyne, executive
director of Virginia Coalition for Open Government. Police have been
encrypting scanners for a number of years, reacting to a larger trend.

“Information about police activity in the hands of the public is
increasingly seen as a threat to police,” she said. “This seems to be part
of that overall direction.”

The implementation costs are about $5 million, with another $250,000 each
year for vendor support. Though it would be paid over multiple years, the
multikey encrypt-ion would be implemented in nine to 12 months. All city
police radios and those used by Emergency Communications and Citizen
Services dispatch and the city’s liaisons in other departments and agencies
would be affected – 2,400 radios total.

Acting Mayor Louis Jones said he expects it to be approved when the council
votes on the budget May 15.

“It’s in the capital improvement program,” he said. “I don’t anticipate
that there will be any discussion on that particular issue.”

Virginia Beach police declined to comment , but in council documents
described five situations in which they said the public’s ability to hear
police in real time impeded their work.

In 2011, they wrote, they were zeroing in on a suspect wanted for multiple
burglaries who was hiding at his girlfriend’s house. But when they went in
to nab him, he was gone.

It turned out he had been listening to them talk about the impending arrest
over their radios, using a police scanner app on his phone.

Other examples point to Facebook groups in which people listen to scanners
and post what they hear. There are at least two in Virginia Beach. One has
nearly 18,000 members, the other about 4,500. At least one member said in a
post that he plans to fight the department’s decision.

About a year ago, Harry Brogan created the smaller group, Virginia Beach
Police Scanners. Brogan said he sets ground rules.

“I do not ever want to see a specific address posted,” he said. It helps
keep police safe, and doesn’t encourage people to show up to what might be
an active scene, he said.

Two screenshots of posts made by an administrator of the other Facebook
group were included in documents police sent to the council. Both were by
the same person – one about a stabbing, the other encouraging members to
aid police waiting for backup. The latter appears to date from College
Beach Weekend, when thousands of young people flocked to the Oceanfront.

Councilman John Moss asked police to explain their need for encryption in
March, prompting the department to put their rationale in writing. He told
The Virginian-Pilot in an email that he believes encryption is a good thing
and that everyone should do it.

Rhyne said the public doesn’t necessarily have the right to listen to
police scanners, just as it doesn’t necessarily have the right to listen in
on people’s phone calls or sit in on city staff meetings. But there’s a
public interest in being able to know about public safety incidents, and
it’s an avenue toward police accountability, she said.

It’s uncommon for police departments in larger cities to want to encrypt
all channels, said Charles Jennings, director of the Christian Regenhard
Center for Emergency Response Studies at John Jay College of Criminal
Justice in New York.

Norfolk, Chesapeake, Portsmouth and Suffolk all use some encrypted channels
for tactical reasons, but most of their channels are open, those
departments said.

Jennings said police often encrypt their tactical channels but leave
general operations channels open. If a situation becomes too sensitive,
officers then have the option of switching to a protected one.

Encrypting all channels also could complicate communications with emergency
response teams, Jennings said. The switch could prevent fire departments or
emergency medical services from responding quickly unless they’re provided
with – or purchase their own – equipment.

Leaving dispatch communications open benefits the public and news outlets
as well, Jennings said, especially in extremely dangerous situations.

“Ultimately, in a breaking disaster-type scenario, you want the press to
have good information quickly so they can pass it on to the public,”
Jennings said. “There’s always an inherent delay in a reporter waiting for
a (public information officer) to craft a statement and pass it on to the
media.”

Using encrypted channels can be beneficial for law enforcement, as long as
it’s done properly, said Eddie Reyes, chairman of the International
Association of Chiefs of Police communications and technology committee and
director of public safety communications in Prince William County.

“Unfortunately, a lot of law enforcement agencies deploy encryption without
a well-thought-out plan,” Reyes said. “It’s a very good technology, it just
has to be rolled out properly.”

For instance, encryption can make it difficult for a department to
communicate with neighboring law enforcement agencies if they don’t use the
same system, he said. That could be a problem when a suspect crosses into
other jurisdictions.

“Criminals don’t know borders. They just go as fast as they can and cross
as many borders as they can,” Reyes said. “As long as your neighbors have
the same level of encryption, then there is no problem. But if they don’t,
that can really break down communications.”

Brogan’s been listening to scanners for about 40 years. He said he
remembers when police departments switched to modulated frequencies. For a
while, the technology wasn’t readily available to the public. But when
capable scanners hit the shelves, listeners tuned in once again.

“It worked for a little while, but as soon as people and companies figured
out how to get around it legally, we went back to listening,” Brogan said.

He said he expects technology soon to provide a way around this new
encryption as well.